• Acronym: WG 24
• Parent Committees: FIS, MEQ
• Term: Oct. 2008 - Oct. 2012
• Co-Chairs:
  Brett Dumbauld (May. 2010 – Oct. 2012, USA)
  Katsuyuki Abo (Oct. 2008 - Oct. 2012, Japan)
  Ingrid Burgetz (Oct. 2008 - Oct. 2012, Canada)
  Kevin Amos (Oct. 2008 – Apr. 2010, USA)

Develop standard methods and tools to assess and compare the environmental interactions and characteristics of existing and planned marine aquaculture activities in PICES member countries.

The Working Group should contain expertise corresponding to the three terms of reference (TORs) outlined below. Working sessions on environmental interaction models of marine aquaculture, risk assessment case studies and infectious diseases will be held at PICES Annual Meetings (AMs) and when possible, at other times as needed. A symposium (likely in the third year) will highlight models and information generated from all three TORs to evaluate environmental interactions associated with aquaculture. Final results will be reported as a PICES publication and, hopefully, also in the peer-reviewed literature. The Working Group will maintain contacts and linkages with PICES Working Groups on Ecosystem-based Management Science and its Application to the North Pacific (WG 19) and on Non-indigenous Aquatic Species (WG 21) and two ICES Working Groups on Environmental Interactions of Marine Aquaculture and on Pathology and Diseases of Marine Organisms.

1. Katsuyuki Abo to lead
   Evaluate approaches currently being used in the different PICES countries to assess and model the interactions of aquaculture operations with surrounding environments. This will involve conducting a comparative assessment of the methodologies, applications, and outputs of different approaches to assess finfish, shellfish, seaweed, and/or integrated multi-trophic aquaculture. Assessments of the approaches will include case studies of their application. As the possibilities for different types of aquaculture and their interactions to be assessed are so vast, it is suggested that a process be developed that prioritize and limits the options. A possible process would:
   
   
   • List types of aquaculture and identify major culture technologies and related species of highest interest to member states. Select three or four important culture technologies and associated species and assess their environmental effects and associated interactions;
   • Review the scientific literature to ascertain if these possible interactions have been determined to be significant;
   • Identify methodologies used to predict the effects of these interactions and the history/uncertainty associated with these predictions;
   • Examine a variety of institutional decision-making models that are used to limit the effects and associated monitoring and mitigation protocols.
   
   
2. Edward Black to lead
   Review and assess current risk assessment methods used to assess environmental interactions of aquaculture and determine what, if anything, should be changed for application in PICES countries to reflect ecosystem-specific aspects. Following the review and assessment, identify appropriate case studies to compare results among countries in the PICES region. This will be achieved by holding a workshop in the second year to compare and discuss possible standardization of methodologies and the selection of potential case studies for assessment with a standardized approach. Much of the information for this exercise can be derived from “item c” in TOR 1 above. Case studies may then be developed. Responsibilities and functions will be similar to the ICES Working Group on Environmental Interactions of Mariculture (WG-19), so the feasibility of holding a joint meeting with this group will be explored.
   
   
3. Kevin Amos to lead
   Assess methods to detect, identify, evaluate and report on infectious disease events and potential interactions between wild and farmed marine animals. If appropriate, develop a recommended standardized approach for detection/evaluation/reporting from wild and cultured populations. The focus of this activity will be on OIE-notifiable diseases and other infectious diseases of regional/economic importance. Discuss and document new and emerging infectious diseases in the PICES region, methods for their detection, and develop models to conduct risk assessments of their potential impacts on both endemic wild and farmed species. If resources are available it would be advisable to test these models by conducting risk assessments on a few (2-3) emerging pathogens. Responsibilities and functions will be similar to the ICES Working Group on Pathology and Diseases of Marine Organisms (WGPDMO), so the possibility of a joint meeting will be explored.
   
   
4. As a conclusion to all the above, we propose to hold a PICES session or separate symposium in the third year to present case studies and results, and submit for publication as a PICES document, in appropriate scientific journals, a summary paper that examines development and application of aquaculture-environment interaction models.